• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263:617]

re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

So your argument is that we shouldn't take your evidence as evidence because it is incomplete and not representative of what you wanted to represent?

No, you should take evidence as evidence. But because it's incomplete, it's inconclusive.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I'll admit the Dems didn't discuss some suggested options that were potentially beneficial. They're not above partisan crappery. But just because the Dems were obstructionists doesn't justify the GOP for doing it.
Washington is nothing if not tit-for-tat. Each is as bad as the other.

I bet the Republicans better hope it's a flop, the way they've continually damned it. I'll use Fox News as my gauge of how poorly it's doing, since they rail day and night about it, but if they suddenly drop coverage....oooops.
Politically they are going to pound away at it all summer and fall. The Republican campaign commercials will be starring Obama, Pelosi and Reid.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I'll agree that there are provisions that are not fair to those who make more. And I don't agree with it but the less fortunate, literally, can't pay more. It's not just healthcare that's too high, it's the insurance paid for coverage. This bill addressed certain aspects of insurance companies denying preexisting conditions, capping limits and dropping coverage, so it's not all bad.

I seriously don't think it matters if the GOP or Dems control the gov, because it's the same bunch of malfunctioning idealism and bureaucracy.

I agree that there are some provisions in the ACA that can broadly be applied as something good for every American, including the things you listed specifically. You're correct that the ACA isn't all bad. But it's also very very far from all good.

And bureaucracy will kill any idea that will have a positive impact on the majority of Americans. I think you are a realist as I am.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Obamacare tops 6 million signups - Mar. 27, 2014


Funny, no mention of this on Fox? Shocking I tell you. Shocking.

You do know they signed up right?

Their is no statics of those that picked a plan let alone paid for it. And let's not mention that 6 million people lost their healthcare plan.

But go ahead and light another candle.....
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Boo hoo. Now Americans won't go broke, lose their homes, lose their retirement and everything they've worked for their entire lives if they get sick. How horrible for the American people.

Horrible in what way, that the current law is hurting over twice as many as it is helping? That the number of people going on medicaid is growing while the number of doctors who accept medicaid patients is dropping and that having insurance for a lot of these people means absolutely nothing. But it does makes some people feel good. Like it or not, this law didn't address healthcare for the poor, it addressed insurance. It is a law the majority didn't want because 80% of Americans were happy with what they had. Instead of taking care of the 20% and that is a high number if we are talking about only getting the poor who didn't have health insurance insurance, not those who could afford it but choose not to get it. We give most of those an insurance policy that is getting more and more worthless.

Pat yourself on the back if you must, but I think it would have been better to address those poor folks who didn't have health care instead of this monster which hurts more than it helps and gives a lot of people a piece of paper that is just that, a piece of paper. but hey, they have that piece of paper.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Washington is nothing if not tit-for-tat. Each is as bad as the other.

Politically they are going to pound away at it all summer and fall. The Republican campaign commercials will be starring Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

Now there are 3 voices that will grate on my nerves for sure.

We actually have a non-stop ad running in NH. It shows our Democratic Senator, Jeanne Shaheen, standing on the floor of the Senate repeating the "if you like it, you can keep it..." lie, and reminding the residents here that she was the one who cast the deciding vote on the ACA. Even my left leaning friends have told me it makes them sweat every time it comes on.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

No, you should take evidence as evidence. But because it's incomplete, it's inconclusive.

How you coming on determining how many of the 6 million were previously uninsured and not kicked off their previous insurance and how many of those 6 million enrolled were eligible for Medicaid prior to Obamacare but didn't sign up before? Don't you think those are valid questions to ask? Wasn't Obamacare designed to insure the uninsured?
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

No, you should take evidence as evidence. But because it's incomplete, it's inconclusive.

I would be interested in hearing your logic to implement another Federal entitlement program and destroy our current healthcare system to insure 6 million uninsured and add 1.8 trillion to the debt over 10 years or 180 billion a year. Guess that 250 billion a year in debt service is going to increase

Obamacare
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

It had served it purpose....but was told it wasn't enough funds to pay for others healthcare.

Obama is looking out for you. Always looking out for you.

Okay, well not you maybe, but he's always looking out for someone I guess.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Moderator's Warning:
Everyone needs to cease the attacks.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

No, you should take evidence as evidence. But because it's incomplete, it's inconclusive.

Exactly, you countered my argument with incomplete, inconclusive evidence. All I did was assume that your evidence had some merit and spun my follow-up argument off of it.

So, here is how it went down:

Step 1: OP sites an article trumpeting that 6 million people have signed up for health PPACA health insurance

Step 2: I post a bit of observational humor to centered on the fact that we actually don't have any good numbers of any signups so there is no grounds for celebration

Step 3: You post numbers to counter my statement

Step 4: I evaluate the success of PPACA based on the numbers you provided.

Step 5: You argue that the numbers you provided aren't any good thereby agreeing with the observation I made in Step 1.

This fight was over after your self inflicted TKO.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Horrible in what way, that the current law is hurting over twice as many as it is helping? That the number of people going on medicaid is growing while the number of doctors who accept medicaid patients is dropping and that having insurance for a lot of these people means absolutely nothing.
I think the government planned it that way. At least, they didn't try to hide it.


But it does makes some people feel good. Like it or not, this law didn't address healthcare for the poor, it addressed insurance. It is a law the majority didn't want because 80% of Americans were happy with what they had. Instead of taking care of the 20% and that is a high number if we are talking about only getting the poor who didn't have health insurance insurance, not those who could afford it but choose not to get it. We give most of those an insurance policy that is getting more and more worthless.
Medicaid was the reason that the health care system needed an over haul. I don't know how putting more people on medicaid will help solve that problem...but the CBO office predicts the ACA will help reduce the nations debt. So perhaps the real reason for the ACA isn't to save the consumers money...it's to save the government money that it pays on the national debt. Apparently, medicaid costs were becoming a bottomless money pit and ACA is the plug.


Pat yourself on the back if you must, but I think it would have been better to address those poor folks who didn't have health care instead of this monster which hurts more than it helps and gives a lot of people a piece of paper that is just that, a piece of paper. but hey, they have that piece of paper.
I think your doom and gloom is a bit premature considering the law has only been in effect for a few months and way too soon to draw such unsubstantiated conclusions. I don't like paying for insurance anymore than next person, but I'm glad that social safety net is there now....and not because of poor folks...but because who knows, me and mine might need it, too. Anyway, as time goes on the law will undoubtedly get "tweaked"...just as other laws of such magnitude have in the past. And in no time at all, people will just take health insurance for granted...just like they do social security.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

You do know they signed up right?

Their is no statics of those that picked a plan let alone paid for it. And let's not mention that 6 million people lost their healthcare plan.

But go ahead and light another candle.....

The right is so desperate for Obamacare to fail. It is pretty pathetic.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Obamacare tops 6 million signups - Mar. 27, 2014


Funny, no mention of this on Fox? Shocking I tell you. Shocking.

I heard it on Fox. Since you don't watch Fox it would make sense you didn't hear it there. My question is do we have independent private sector confirmation of this or are we just taking the government's word for it?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I heard it on Fox. Since you don't watch Fox it would make sense you didn't hear it there. ?

Web site.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I agree that there are some provisions in the ACA that can broadly be applied as something good for every American, including the things you listed specifically. You're correct that the ACA isn't all bad. But it's also very very far from all good.

And bureaucracy will kill any idea that will have a positive impact on the majority of Americans. I think you are a realist as I am.

Yes, we are in agreement that it's half good/ half poop and all we need to do is flush one half. But politics will probably prevent that, so we end up with what it is. ;)
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I'm a conservative and I'd love to see people get helped. But all people, not just the poor. Healthcare costs are way too high for most of us and it's eating up a substantial portions of our incomes. This bill didn't fix that problem.

The GOP isn't going to sweep anything. They will retain control of the House and probably pick up a few seats in the Senate. POTUS is too far away to consider.

I respectfully disagree. My prediction is that there will end up being a 50-50 split in the Senate, but am open to the possibility that the GOP will end up with 51. In non-presidential year elections, Democrats just don't turn out.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I respectfully disagree. My prediction is that there will end up being a 50-50 split in the Senate, but am open to the possibility that the GOP will end up with 51. In non-presidential year elections, Democrats just don't turn out.

and if democrats do turn out?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I respectfully disagree. My prediction is that there will end up being a 50-50 split in the Senate, but am open to the possibility that the GOP will end up with 51. In non-presidential year elections, Democrats just don't turn out.

You could be right about the 50-50 split. It sure will be interesting to see what happens. I'll admit I thought Romney was going to win in 2012 so what do I know.:lamo

What's your theory on why the Dems don't turn out in the non-POTUS election years?

By the way, they did (unfortunately) turn out in 2006, in droves. Not the GOP's best year.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

and if democrats do turn out?

If they do turn out, they will only lose 3 seats at most in the Senate, but Republicans still control the House. The GOP gerrymander of the 2010's was brilliant.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I think the government planned it that way. At least, they didn't try to hide it.


Medicaid was the reason that the health care system needed an over haul. I don't know how putting more people on medicaid will help solve that problem...but the CBO office predicts the ACA will help reduce the nations debt. So perhaps the real reason for the ACA isn't to save the consumers money...it's to save the government money that it pays on the national debt. Apparently, medicaid costs were becoming a bottomless money pit and ACA is the plug.


I think your doom and gloom is a bit premature considering the law has only been in effect for a few months and way too soon to draw such unsubstantiated conclusions. I don't like paying for insurance anymore than next person, but I'm glad that social safety net is there now....and not because of poor folks...but because who knows, me and mine might need it, too. Anyway, as time goes on the law will undoubtedly get "tweaked"...just as other laws of such magnitude have in the past. And in no time at all, people will just take health insurance for granted...just like they do social security.

Medicaid pays the doctors at a 50% reimbursement rate for the approved costs vs. Medicare's 80%, if we are going to put the poor on medicaid and expect it to actually help them, then we must raise the reimbursement rate so doctors will want to accept medicaid patients. New Jersey believe it or not has the lowest number/percentage wise that will accept medicaid insurance, that is 40%. Perhaps you are right, it was planned this way. Why? I don't know, but what I do know is putting more and more people on medicaid without increasing the number of doctors who accept medicaid and new patients it is not solving the problem.

I was referring to both a Gallup and a Rasmussen poll which stated the ACA was hurting more than twice as many people as it has helping. Perhaps that is doom and gloom, but I always thought the idea was always to help more than you hurt. The social safety net is necessary, but I am not sure if the ACA actually classifies as one. But that is just a matter of opinion. According to a CNN truth squad, there were 14 million Americans who qualified for Medicare/Medicaid prior to the ACA, but were not enrolled. Just getting those enrolled would have solved half the problem without any additional legislation. So when I look at the ACA, I just say Hmm, figures.
 
Back
Top Bottom